PRO FOOTBALL

PRO FOOTBALL; BARGAINING PROPOSALS REFLECT WIDE GAP ON KEY ISSUES

By MICHAEL JANOFSKY

Published: May 3, 1987

When the chief labor negotiators for the National Football League players and owners exchanged opening proposals for a new collective bargaining agreement two weeks ago, they gave each other documents that reflected vast differences in how they think professional football's economic system should operate.

In general, the league's proposal would perpetuate the status quo, with a system that would control salary limits and the ability of a player to move from one team to another at the conclusion of his contract obligation.

The union's proposal would create a new system, one in which a player could increase his earning potential with contract guarantees and, like employees in most other industries, have a say in choosing where he works.

The two proposals, copies of which have been obtained by The New York Times, also reflect opposing views of drug testing as part of an overall chemical dependency program. Management, which had the right to test players at the beginning of a season and anytime thereafter ''upon reasonable cause,'' favors the additional step of unscheduled testing. The union proposal insists ''there will not be any spot testing'' for substance abuse or dependency.

The gulf between the proposals was evident within hours after they were exchanged at the opening negotiating session in Washington. In turn, the chief negotiators - Gene Upshaw of the players association and Jack Donlan of the league's Management Council - addressed reporters in a news conference, and each spoke respectfully, with none of the rhetoric that characterized such appearances in 1982, when the last bargaining agreement was negotiated. 2 Unusual Possibilities That change in tone seemed to suggest one or two unusual possibilities. One is that the negotiating season ahead may unfold in a manner unlike before, when Donlan and Ed Garvey, Upshaw's predecessor, argued as much about personalities as issues. The other is that differences in the proposals are so vast that only a serious attempt to bridge them would prevent another strike.

The union proposal includes several novel concepts, including a more traditional interpretation of the word ''contract.'' The union would require both the club, as well as the player, to honor the length of the contract, which means if a player signs for three years, the team would be obligated for the full amount of the contract, even if the player is later cut. In effect, that would guarantee the contract of every player in the league.

The proposal also eliminates three major impediments to the form of ''free agency'' the players want: the option year on a contract, which effectively ties the player to a team in perpetuity; first refusal rights to the player's old team if a new one makes him an offer, and compensation for the old team by the new team if a player moves on.

The union proposal also includes a ''Club Incentives'' program, which is a system designed to award those clubs that make the playoffs. Such a system, the proposal says, would create for the clubs a ''meaningful incentive to improve their teams through the acquisition and/or re-signing of veteran free agents.'' $3.5 Million to Super Winner The program would award the Super Bowl winner $3.5 million, the loser $2.5 million and so on.

If the overall effect of the union's proposals in these areas would help increase a player's mobility and compensation package, then many of the management sections would appear designed to reduce or keep it at current levels. These are among them:

* Option year renewals would be reduced to 100 percent. For the last five years, a team was required to pay a player at least 110 percent of his previous salary in an option year.

* A new stiputation would be added saying that any player who ''who has failed or refused'' to participate in a postseason game would not be paid for it. In the current agreement, no such condition exists.

* The new agreement would set forth entry level wage scales, which would create minimum levels for rookie contracts, taking into account base salaries and bonuses.

* The draft would be extended through 1997 and increased to 15 rounds, from the current 12.

By now, each side has had ample opportunity to review the other's ideas. Within a few days, the next negotiating session is expected to be scheduled. By the time they sit down again, and hear each other's reactions, they will have an even better idea of just how far apart they are.